These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
700 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11655857)
1. Infant care review committees: an effective approach to the Baby Doe dilemma? Shapiro RS; Barthel R Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):827-62. PubMed ID: 11655857 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Disabled newborns and the federal child abuse amendments: tenuous protection. Smith SR Hastings Law J; 1986 May; 37(5):765-825. PubMed ID: 11655856 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Infant Doe and Baby Jane Doe: medical treatment of the handicapped newborn. Horan DJ; Balch BJ Linacre Q; 1985 Feb; 52(1):45-76. PubMed ID: 11651855 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The legislative response to Infant Doe. Kuzma AL Indiana Law J; 1983-1984; 59(3):377-416. PubMed ID: 11658614 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Treatment dilemmas for imperiled newborns: why quality of life counts. Rhoden NK South Calif Law Rev; 1985 Sep; 58(6):1283-347. PubMed ID: 11660412 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Balancing wishes with wisdom: sustaining infant life. Wakefield-Fisher M Nurs Health Care; 1987 Nov; 8(9):517-20. PubMed ID: 11644099 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Severely disabled newborns: to live or let die? Jackson CC J Leg Med; 1987 Mar; 8(1):135-76. PubMed ID: 11644153 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Born to live or born to die: the handicapped newborn in New Jersey. Sarno JJ Seton Hall Legis J; 1987; 11(1):201-22. PubMed ID: 11651899 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The care of defective neonates, ethics committees and federal intervention. Riga PJ Linacre Q; 1984 Aug; 51(3):255-76. PubMed ID: 11649572 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Model Procedures for Child Protective Service Agencies Responding to Reports of Withholding Medically Indicated Treatment from Disabled Infants with Life-Threatening Conditions. Nicholson EB; Horowitz RM; Parry J; ; Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 1986; 10(3):221-49. PubMed ID: 11651933 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. "New" rights for handicapped newborns: Baby Doe and beyond. Phillips CA Calif West Law Rev; 1985; 22(1):127-58. PubMed ID: 11658804 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Withdrawal of life-support in the newborn: whose baby is it? Clark FI Southwest Univ Law Rev; 1993; 23(1):1-46. PubMed ID: 11659817 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Medical ethics in life and death. Thompson R Editor Res Rep; 1984 Feb; 1(8):147-68. PubMed ID: 11652477 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Quality of life, sanctity of creation: palliative or apotheosis? Smith GP Neb Law Rev; 1984; 63(4):709-40. PubMed ID: 11652479 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The treatment of handicapped newborns: is there a role for law? Burt RA Issues Law Med; 1986 Jan; 1(4):279-91. PubMed ID: 11651814 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Baby Doe cases: compromise and moral dilemma. Haddon PA Emory Law J; 1985; 34(3-4):545-615. PubMed ID: 11658790 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Baby Jane Doe ruling upheld; suit fails. Curran M Ob Gyn News; 1983 Dec 15-31; 18(24):8. PubMed ID: 11653509 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Of diagnoses and discrimination: discriminatory nontreatment of infants with HIV infection. Crossley MA Columbia Law Rev; 1993 Nov; 93(7):1581-667. PubMed ID: 11659791 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Another court challenge predicted following revised 'Baby Doe' rule. Med World News; 1983 Jul; 24(14):54, 59. PubMed ID: 11645668 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Health care groups favor local 'Baby Doe' review. Med World News; 1983 Sep; 24(18):9. PubMed ID: 11645497 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]